how is gas improved? ECU lighter in weight.. hehhe

 

We did that at Carlsbad, ran a 15.4 and then a 15.1 one run after another.

 

Loren - 92 traps is pretty damn good for a stock car.. my car was trapping at 87 and 88 stock..

whats up with all these cali brothers using "corrected times" .. or is it a west coast thing? because Kirk is running around saying his 95 Auto runs 14.8 "corrected"

can we just use whas on the time slip?

 

.9, huh? LOL!!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BrianV

Here's my honest opinion about the ECU. It has no affect on the car what-so-ever at 3200 RPM or below. Right at 3200-3300 RPM the engine opens up, but it doesn't have much of an affect after 5000-5500 RPM. When drag racing you spend most of your time at 5000+ RPM, so the gains in drag racing are minimal. The real gains are evident when you're cruising on the FWY at 90+ MPH and you goto pass a car in 5th gear. 5th gear pulls like 4th gear would on a non-chipped car. The amount of midrange power and torque is a night and day difference. In that specific range the ECU puts down more power than the YPipe did when I got it. However, the Ypipe greatly increases power up top as well, I feel the engine does not benefit from the ECU at above 5000 RPM or so.

 

Where's the corrected time link? I should be runnin' 14.8's corrected too since I've run 15.4's and 15.3's in my Auto..

 

with or without chromies?

 

Without... 15.6's and 15.7's with..

 

Corrected times...

I might be a 12 second max then... NOT!!!

I agree with Dave B, please post your uncorrected times and/or note when the times you post are corrected.

 

post *****

 

Corrected times mean very little to most people, not a flame, just a statement. BTW, if you want to argue it, 1/3there2/3rdstogo can run 14.8s with his auto NA.

 

post *****

 

torqueless retard :retard:

 

don't rub it in

 

So are we ever going to get someone to run this test of the ECU, THE RIGHT WAY?

 

Didn't you guys hear what Brian said "We did that at Carlsbad, ran a 15.4 and then a 15.1 one run after another." It's .3 sec difference regardless if it's corrected or non corrected.

 

dont compare the cali peeps to 1/23gottob1/3(whatever)


im outraged

cali barely got a decent track "cali speedway"
too bad it was only open for 3 weeks...its gonna be closed
till january...

 

calcualtor??? Where's the link??

 

In other words he ran a 15.1 @ 1/2 mile and whatever temp and humidity and NOT a 14.3 'corrected'.

 

Damn if he runs a 1/2 mile 2640ft in 15.1 seconds then he has a fast *** car. I agree corrected times should be noted and probably not used at all.

 

thats true cuz im stock and I pulled 15.3 with a 1.3 R/T ....3 times...

 

 

Well, Another member of the .org and I did some of our own testing at the track by swapping ECUs. We used the G-Force ECU as the tester, which I later bought from him. He has a 97' 5-speed, completely stock, except for the ECU. His best time stock (stock ECU) was a 15.6 uncorrected. We then swapped in the G-Force ECU and he immediately ran a 15.3. His times continued to drop down to a 15.1 for the night. (.5 seconds!!) Then came my turn. I have a 96' Auto with nothing but a cone filter. My best time for the night on the stock ECU was a 16.3. (Damn slow) We went and swapped in the G-Force ECU, and ended up having to reset it. (Going from a 97' 5-speed to a 96' auto gets it confused.) I then went and ran a 15.9 with a 15.8 as the best of the night. (again, .5 seconds!!) That was enough proof for me to buy it. I highly recommend it. And no Cheston is not paying me.

 

thats funny 5 people ran with the ECU and ran .2 secs 2mph faster..

 

The ECU will have a larger effect on the 1/4 mile in an auto than a 5spd because with the auto you're racing for a much longer time in the affected power band.